{"title":"Auto-organização social no mundo do trabalho e produção: notas para uma crítica à economia solidária","authors":"Cássio Brancaleone","doi":"10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The contemporary debate on alternative experiences of work organization and production isin Brazil dominated by the so-called “solidarity economy”. Also known as “cooperatives” or“recovered factories and enterprises”, many of these experiences are evidently not new, goingback to the first practices of resistance and social self-organization carried out by the workingclass. At the same time, their condition and potential as a societal “alternative” in a varietyof circumstances are minimized and even challenged by the way in which they fall withinthe framework of relations of subordination and dependence on agencies, mechanisms andactors of the state and the capitalist market. The article in question aims to present a briefcritical review of the theoretical repertoire mobilized by exponents of the solidarity economyin the perspectives from the anarchist and heterodox marxist, relating it to the proposal of the“participatory economy” (PARECON). Thus, it is hoped to contribute with a critique of thistheoretical framework through the recovery of the antisystemic sense of the concept of self-management, subsidizing the reflection and analysis related to such experiences.","PeriodicalId":47847,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Society","volume":"19 1","pages":"301-336"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p301","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
The contemporary debate on alternative experiences of work organization and production isin Brazil dominated by the so-called “solidarity economy”. Also known as “cooperatives” or“recovered factories and enterprises”, many of these experiences are evidently not new, goingback to the first practices of resistance and social self-organization carried out by the workingclass. At the same time, their condition and potential as a societal “alternative” in a varietyof circumstances are minimized and even challenged by the way in which they fall withinthe framework of relations of subordination and dependence on agencies, mechanisms andactors of the state and the capitalist market. The article in question aims to present a briefcritical review of the theoretical repertoire mobilized by exponents of the solidarity economyin the perspectives from the anarchist and heterodox marxist, relating it to the proposal of the“participatory economy” (PARECON). Thus, it is hoped to contribute with a critique of thistheoretical framework through the recovery of the antisystemic sense of the concept of self-management, subsidizing the reflection and analysis related to such experiences.
期刊介绍:
Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.